Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

Domenech resigns over allegations of plagiarism (updated)

[update:  See new post here]

Details at the Post Blog.

Having met Ben last month, I can report that I found him to be a very bright, very articulate, very glib young man.  He is also a very gifted writer.  On the charges of plagiarism, I’ll accept Ben’s explanation—whatever it is—because I also found him to be quite a forthright gentleman, which means that I expect he will admit to any wrongdoing.

What is most distateful about this episode from the perspective of the blogosphere, on the other hand, is the palpable glee with which many on the left set out after Ben and are now luxuriating in his resignation.  And, of course, they have taught the WaPo the lesson they wished to teach it:  that rightwing commentary will be scrutinized in direct inverse to the acceptance they give to the obvious biases of leftwing media figures.

Ben, for what ever mistakes he may have made, at least appended his own name to whatever columns he posted or wrote publicly.1 Which is more than can be said for the vast number of leftwing bloggers who feel quite at ease attacking people with “impugn”ity from behind their stage names.

Because make no mistake:  their entire schtick has become political theater—and often of the most hateful variety.  In recent months, we’ve seen a ratcheting up of attempts to undermine the credibility of writers who don’t toe the progressive line (for my part, I’ve been called an idiot, a failed academic, a pill-popping hausfrau, untalented, uncreative, pretentious etc., etc.).  But of course, it’s the right who engages in the “politics of personal destruction.” That’s just, well, an established given.

Ben Domenech is not Dan Rather; but no matter.  The scalp is the thing.  And the left has theirs today.

I consider Ben a friend.  If he plagiarized, he was wrong for doing so, and resigning was a good first step to rehabilitating his credibility.  But he has much to commend him, something I hope no one on the right fails to keep in mind.  His talent is genuine; his accomplishments, at such a young age, nothing short of astounding.

Schadenfreude is an ugly thing.  But somehow, it seems to fit many in the leftwing blog hive like a perfectly tailored uniform.

Gee, who woulda thunk it?

****

update:  I have removed the period at the end of the excerpt that the paragons of integrity on the left continue to misquote.  The new sentence now reads:  “On the charges of plagiarism, I’ll accept Ben’s explanation—whatever it is—because I also found him to be quite a forthright gentleman, which means that I expect he will admit to any wrongdoing.” For some reason, the visiting lefties kept leaving off everything after “whatever it is.”

Couple that statement with my later statement in the piece:

I consider Ben a friend.  If he plagiarized, he was wrong for doing so, and resigning was a good first step to rehabilitating his credibility.

…and decide for yourselves if you think I’m “excusing” him.

1Re:  “Augustine.” In the early days of blogging, Ben had a blog he published under his own name.  From what I understand, he used an alias on Red State because he’d received threats. This has been corroborated by people close to Ben via email.

With respect to the plagiarism, though, I thought we were dealing with writings he’d signed his name to and published — not blog posts.  That I drew this distinction is a source of much mirth to folks like Tbogg and the Atrions, but if what they really object to is plagiarism—and the plagiarism occured in pieces with Ben’s name appended—why quibble over his blog postings?

Geez.  I hope if I do another “open thread” post, Atrios won’t accuse me of plagiarism.  Because he OWNS that shit, baby!

100 Replies to “Domenech resigns over allegations of plagiarism (updated)”

  1. actus says:

    What is most distateful about this episode from the perspective of the blogosphere is the palpable glee with which many on the left set out after Ben and are now luxuriating in his resignation

    Can you imagine that people are happy that they were able to stop a journalistic institution from lending its credibility to a partisan creationist red-baiter? Low low world we live in.

    Ben, for what ever mistakes he may have made, at least appended his own name to whatever he posted or wrote publicly.

    I don’t think his redstate.org comments were under his own name.  It was a pseudonimous veil, perhaps easily pierced, but a veil nonetheless. It turns out it was a smart idea to have done that, perhaps would have been smarter to make the veil stronger.

  2. Russ says:

    Ben Domenech is not Dan Rather

    No kidding.  Rather never accepted responsibility for his actions, and the Left defends him to this day.

  3. mrbones says:

    Ben, for what ever mistakes he may have made, at least appended his own name to whatever he posted or wrote publicly. Which is more than can be said for the vast number of leftwing bloggers who feel quite at ease attacking people with “impugn”-ity from behind their stage names.

    Of course, he did blog under a “stage name.” T’was “Augustine”, I believe, it was under that nom de plume that he wrote some of his more vile screeds.

  4. Alex says:

    “Ben, for what ever mistakes he may have made, at least appended his own name to whatever he posted or wrote publicly.”

    First of all, that’s just not true – he blogged under a psuedonym at Red State. Second of all, it’s not really as admirable as you make it sound: while I agree that it’s good not to be anonymous in your writings on the blogosphere, you really shouldn’t be commending someone for having the fortitude to put their own name on someone else’s writing.

  5. Defense Guy says:

    If he plagiarized, then it is good that he resigned.  I said as much on the comments that at the WaPo when the allegations came out.  I also like Ben’s writing and felt he would make a good addition to the WaPo’s OPINION givers. 

    Having said that, the majority of the comments both before and after the plagiarism were right out of the Democratic Underground.  The most vile, hateful, untruthful crap you are likely to see.

  6. BumperStickerist says:

    Jeff,

    You do realize that Ben, having been exposed as a Right Wing hitman, plagiarist, and all around bad guy, had an epiphany. 

    He’s now a senior editor with Media Matters for America and will start posting items on Monday.  I expect that his credibility in those matters will be unquestioned by the Left.

    .

  7. topsecretk9 says:

    so does this mean we can expect a Ward Churchill’s resignation anytime soon?

    Oh, that’s right…he’s busy teaching young minds.

    Anyhow, the left as usual knowing not what the meaning of restraint is has probably incensed some intrepid blogger on a crusade to dredge up multiple accounts of the ethical writings of lefty bloggers.

    And of course the resident book burning fascist Firedoglady is busy gloating in her sham, conveniently (as usual) forgetting that it was a big sop to the right

  8. topsecretk9 says:

    If he plagiarized, then it is good that he resigned.

    Yep, at least he has the integrity and balls to do the right thing.

    But all is not lost, he still has a future…Joe Biden blazed that path for him.

  9. BumperStickerist says:

    I keed.  I keed.

    Ben Domenech will rehab his cred by doing for Dr. Joshua Micah Marshall.

    But the points about plagiarism and Ben using a nom de internet to post his screeds remain. 

    Having viewed the examples, there’s no question in my mind that Ben lifted whole paragraphs at times or made minimal ‘Vanilla Ice’ like changes to another author’s works.

    .

  10. topsecretk9 says:

    Joe Biden blazed that path for him.

    Hey I just remembered, it’s even better…Biden is gunning for the nomination! I’m sure this won’t be an issue now

  11. Crimso says:

    so does this mean we can expect a Ward Churchill’s resignation anytime soon?

    Or Joe Biden’s?

  12. actus says:

    Hey I just remembered, it’s even better…Biden is gunning for the nomination! I’m sure this won’t be an issue now

    It did torpedo an earlier attempt. Lets hope it does so again.

  13. Crimso says:

    Damn it k9, give somebody else a chance.

  14. Aaron Adams says:

    On the charges of plagiarism, I’ll accept Ben’s explanation, whatever it is.

    How very ______ of you.

  15. I don’t understand the obsession with Ben Domenech. So the Post hired a conservative blogger. Who cares? I am more concerned about how the president’s spokesperson lies to reporters. Apparently Scott McClellan believes there is religious freedom in Afghanistan. Meanwhile a Christian is going to be executed for his religion.

  16. Kyda Sylvester says:

    This story has been only on the outer fringes of my attention, but I do take issue with one thing the WaPo says:

    Plagiarism is perhaps the most serious offense that a writer can commit or be accused of. Washingtonpost.com will do everything in its power to verify that its news and opinion content is sourced completely and accurately at all times.

    Although plagiarism is indeed serious, for a journalist, making crap up is actually the most serious offense a writer can commit. And shaping a story by deliberate omission of pertinent facts. And using selective quoting technics, or misquoting altogether. These offences, committed as they are against the news consuming public, have far more serious consequences than any lack of attribution. I hope the WaPo is equally diligent here.

  17. God Bless George W Bush & GOP says:

    HEH cool smile

  18. TalkLeft says:

    Jeff, I think you are wrong on this one.  Even Michelle Malkin agrees what he did is inexusable and opines the right should stop standing behind him.

    I admire your loyalty to someone you consider a friend, and have no problem with your sticking up for other character traits you find admirable, but sticking up for him regarding the plagiarism charges is going overboard.

  19. Brett says:

    Can you imagine that people are happy that they were able to stop a journalistic institution from lending its credibility to a partisan creationist red-baiter?

    But it’s a-okay for that same journalistic institution to lend its credibility to, say, Dan Froomkin.

  20. actus says:

    But it’s a-okay for that same journalistic institution to lend its credibility to, say, Dan Froomkin.

    Exactly. An Ex journalist that is described by partisan red-baiting operatives as a “lying weasel-faced Democrat shill.”

  21. The next interesting test will be whether the post hired a new conservative blogger, or gives up the experiment.

  22. salvage says:

    Having met Ben last month, I can report that I found him to be a very bright, very articulate, very glib young man.  He is also a very gifted writer.  On the charges of plagiarism, I’ll accept Ben’s explanation, whatever it is.  Because I also found him to be quite a forthright gentleman, which means that I expect he will admit to any wrongdoing.

    Awesome.

    And if Ben’s expanation is “I’m a theif and a hack who’s never had an orginal throught in my life!”?

    Or

    “Clinton’s penis made me do it!”

    Or

    “I’m a Republican, it’s what we do.”

    That’d be cool?

    You sir are hysterical.

  23. Galley_Queen says:

    “Because make no mistake:  their entire schtick has become political theater—and often of the most hateful variety.”

    You ARE talking about the rightwing here, right?  You know…the VRW that has bought and paid for the likes of Rush, Hannity, Coulter, etc., etc., etc?

    Sign me

    A Kinder, Gentler Democrat.

    Not.

  24. rls says:

    I don’t know the whole story on the plagarism allegations.  I wonder why he would have resigned if there was no substance to them though.  If he is guilty of these allegations, then I say he certainly should not be writing “opinion” pieces.

    I don;t know enough of his writing to comment on the quality or the depth of his intelligence, so I won’t. 

    I hope the WaPo continues to try to balance the editorial content of its online unit.

  25. Brett says:

    Even Michelle Malkin agrees what he did is inexusable and opines the right should stop standing behind him.

    I sort of savor the irony of Jeralynn Meritt quoting Michelle Malkin approvingly.

    But come off it, Jeralynn: you people aren’t the high-minded guardians of journalistic integrity you’re currently posing as. You’re a loathesome collection of crass partisan opportunists who, bent on destroying somebody who represented a threat to the ideological monoculture of the Washington Post, simply proved the old axiom that even a broken clock is right twice a day. Your ilk were hurling the vilest calumnies at Domenech for nearly a week before the plagiarism allegations broke, and your sudden fealty to the cause of journalistic integrity is utterly laughable given that you stand foursquare behind Joe Biden.

    It’s not to defend Domenech to regard you and the rest of his detractors as contemptible oxygen thieves.

  26. Brett says:

    Exactly. An Ex journalist that is described by partisan red-baiting operatives as a “lying weasel-faced Democrat shill.”

    You mean an ex-journalist who is, in fact, a lying Democrat shill.

  27. Mike says:

    ut it’s a-okay for that same journalistic institution to lend its credibility to, say, Dan Froomkin. Posted by Brett at 03:13

    Dang, I didn’t realize that Fromkin is a partisan creationist red-baiter. Please provide cites.

  28. Dr. Filbert says:

    Wait! Wait! It ain’t true. It was Benny’s evil, twin clone named Lenny.

  29. david says:

    What is it with you people?  “I’ll accept Ben’s explanation, whatever it is.” What explanation?  The guy stole.  No lib blogger lifted other people’s work and put it in his columns.  So what if he spouts the party line, if you give him a pass for his dishonesty, you clearly demonstrate your ethics are relative and accountabilty is only for “the other guy”.

  30. neil says:

    that rightwing commentary will be scrutinized in direct inverse to the acceptance they give to the obvious biases of leftwing media figures.

    Maybe they’ll hire you, Jeff—you really have a way with words!

  31. Defense Guy says:

    Great, the Atrios crowd is back.

    So tell me guys, where was the outrage over the plagerism accusations against Ward Churchill?  I am not saying one excuses the other, but if you are consistent you will have no problem pointing me to the posts condemning it.

  32. Mal de mer says:

    I’ll accept Ben’s explanation, whatever it is.

    Oh, right….you’re that blogger who went completely coo-coo bananas the other day, right?

  33. renato says:

    that rightwing commentary will be scrutinized in direct inverse to the acceptance they give to the obvious biases of leftwing media figures.

    if you know of any ‘leftwing media figures’ who are plagiarists, please tell us what you know.

  34. Darleen says:

    Commandante

    Oh MY, ya mean a country that NEVER had any democracy, any history of national human rights doesn’t IMMEDIATELY and completely and PERFECTLY resemble a School Board meeting in Iowa?

    Heavens! We’ve been lied to!

    Listen, AssComander, you’re behind the latest

    An Afghan man possibly facing execution for converting from Islam to Christianity is expected “to be released in the coming days,” a source with detailed knowledge of the case said Friday.

    Word of Abdul Rahman’s release comes after days of international pressure and the day before the Afghan Cabinet was scheduled to discuss the case of the 41-year-old father of two.

  35. Brett says:

    No lib blogger lifted other people’s work and put it in his columns.

    Sean-Paul Kelly.

    PW3ND.

  36. noah says:

    As I understand it, the Afghan christian does not face execution “for his religion” but for converting from Islam to christianity which may seem like a distinction without a difference but I believe it is correct to say that otherwise christians do not face execution in Afghanistan.

    So the commenter upthread should apologize to Scott McClellan.

  37. david says:

    Defense Guy:”So tell me guys, where was the outrage over the plagerism accusations against Ward Churchill?”

    Who’s Ward Churchill?  He sounds very important.

  38. Doug says:

    “I’ll accept Ben’s explanation, whatever it is.”

    That explains a lot about Bushbot ethics:

    “I’ll accept Bush’s explanation, whatever it is.”

    PLEASE FOOL ME! PLEASE! PLEASE!

    Reality keeps biting the faith-based community on the gluteus.

  39. Dr. Filbert says:

    Can’t wait until Benny becomes nuttier than a Volunteer State preacher’s wife.

  40. The Kakistocrat says:

    Ben Domenech is not Dan Rather; but no matter.

    This needs to be said again.  While Dan Rather has his subordinates fabricate quotes and steal other people’s writings, Domenech rolls up his sleeves, and just does it himself.

  41. neil says:

    So tell me guys, where was the outrage over the plagerism accusations against Ward Churchill?

    What planet are you living on, dude?

  42. Darleen says:

    Jeff

    I couldn’t load your site for about 10 minutes.

    Any strange traffic coming your way from the usual suspects?

  43. ss says:

    I think your take is far too gentle. I prefer Malkin’s take–good guy, but shame on him. Moonbats are dirty little partisan bastards, but they’re on target here. Their glee stings, but it shouldn’t be more than disappointment if we believe ourselves to be concerned with truth, not partisanship. Sure, he can be your friend and a bright guy, and we should allow him time to mount his defense, but the apparent shameless lack of good judgment is worthy of harsh criticism. He shouldn’t get slack we wouldn’t grant Eason Jordan or Mary Mapes or Dana Milbank.

    I wouldn’t deny the left their scalp here. Their work should be commended, rather than demeaned. Here’s a case where the left actually made a “kill” based on actual fact-based research and attention to legitimate ethical concerns, rather than by twisting innocent statements to sound bigoted, or by pounding ad nauseum on discredited talking-points or baseless assertions of bad-faith.

    If we truly want a noble opposition confronting us with honest disagreement rather than hateful, flailing disingenuousness, it would do us well to acknowledge impropriety and not to defend indefensible acts. I would hope the right can out-class the left by actually acknowledging a lack of ethics where it exists. Though, for my part, I’m mitigating my disappointment with my own schadenfreude regarding the WaPo’s and MSM’s woeful fact-checking, truth-seeking abilities vis-a-vis the Army of Davids on the internet. It’s brutally Darwinian out here, and that’s pretty cool.

  44. actus says:

    You mean an ex-journalist who is, in fact, a lying Democrat shill.

    As described by creationist red-baiting liars.

  45. Major John says:

    Sorry Jeff, I must respectfully disagree.  No excuse cuts it. To me, plagarism is a strict liability offense.  He did it, he should have gone, he did go. 

    If the Left wants to wank about it – OK.  Guess you have to have something to pass the time.

  46. Defense Guy says:

    Who’s Ward Churchill?  He sounds very important.

    Typical.  I’ll mark you down as ideologically pure. 

    And remember, this is for posterity so be honest…

  47. tb says:

    I sort of savor the irony of Jeralynn Meritt quoting Michelle Malkin approvingly.

    No irony there. You don’t have to “approve” of rats to notice they’re abandoning the ship.

    Your ilk were hurling the vilest calumnies at Domenech for nearly a week before the plagiarism allegations broke, and your sudden fealty to the cause of journalistic integrity is utterly laughable given that you stand foursquare behind Joe Biden.

    The “calumnies” I read mostly took the form of questioning his extreme views, his qualifications as a journalist, and the WaPo’s rationale for hiring him. Those are all off limits because a Democrat once plagiarized a speech? What are we supposed to talk about, his hair?

  48. Brett says:

    As described by creationist red-baiting liars.

    No. As described by me.

    Unless you’re insinuating that I’m a creationist red-baiting liar. In which case, put up or shut up.

  49. Inspector Callahan says:

    What planet are you living on, dude?

    Look, moron, the only ones making any noise about Ward Churchill were those of us on the right.  You lefties were quiet about the whole thing, and Atrios was just as quiet.

    One standard for lefties, one for the right.

    Left-wing, wacko, hypocrites, the whole bunch of them.

    Where’s that can of bug spray…

    TV (Harry)

  50. Earl says:

    From Thomas over at Redstate. And note: He’s one of the one who runs the place:

    For the record By: Thomas

    I repeat: Should the entire American Left fall over dead tomorrow, I would rejoice, and order pizza to celebrate. They are not my countrymen; they are animals who happen to walk upright and make noises that approximate speech. They are below human. I look forward to seeing each and every one in Hell.

    To those conservatives who couldn’t wait to find wrongdoing where none existed: Gee, funny you didn’t get all hyped up about this with Bob Bork. Or Sam Alito. I guess maybe your common sense detector—or decency reserve—only kicks in when it gets you something you want?

    You’re all dead to me, as well. Too bad: One lady in particular was a favorite writer of mine. Ah, well.

    For you to accuse the Left of what is the Right-O-Sphere’s very essence is revealing, and pathetic.

    And you’re supposed to be gleeful when truth wins out over lies. Why on Earth don’t you know that?

  51. rls says:

    I’m with Major John.  I give him credit for going out the door, not being carried out.  Go ahead and let the fleas bite.

    I do hope the WaPo continues its “balancing” experiment.

  52. Robert Green says:

    Ward Churchill, for those of you who don’t know, was recently hired by the Wall Street Journal online to “balance” James Taranto.  Churchill’s father, Ward Sr., was a Clinton white house operative who was involved in helping the gay lobby get access to Clinton directly.  Churchill went to public school where he was constantly indoctrinated with left-wing propaganda all day every day.  He started a website whose stated purpose was to be the beginning of the left wing takeover of the Democratic party, and he has been a prime mover in left-wing circles ever since.  the list of people with whom he has interacted include the clintons, the gores, mark warner, bono, jesse jackson, noam chomsky and so on.  at a certain point it is hard to know where the left ends and churchill begins, so central is he to Democratic party discourse these days.

    i’m told if you google his writing you can find over 50 examples of plagiarism in a half hour.  and it is because of that, not his anti-9/11-victims views, that i’m afraid the WSJ online will have egg on its face very soon. 

    they never should have hired someone like him, a political operative, to balance Taranto, who is a real journalist.

    HEY RUBES

    IF YOU THINK ANYONE ON THE LEFT GIVES A SH*T ABOUT WARD CHURCHILL OR ANYTHING THAT HE WRITES, YOU ARE EVEN STUPIDER THAN I COULD HAVE THOUGHT POSSIBLE.  and i have a great imagination.

    oh, and jeffy-poo–nice one on the anonymous thing.  you really do your research before you spout off a farrago of lies.

  53. Inspector Callahan says:

    In case the lefties currently infesting this comment thread hadn’t noticed, MOST of the regular conservatives here break ranks with our host on this one.

    Yes, conservatives can have differing opinions.

    I know it’s a strange concept to grasp for the current infestation of trolls…

    TV (Harry)

  54. Darleen says:

    Major John

    Can I quibble? Jeff didn’t say he’d accept Domenech’s “excuse” but would be accepting of his explanation. A person CAN accept and fess up to their own wrong doing (or, if you will, sinning) and still explain how it came to be. Friends often want to know “why” even as they condemn the wrong doing.

    I think the resignation was correct. I’m glad he did it before having to be fired. And as long as Domenech doesn’t do a Ratheresque “but no one has PROVED the memos are fake” style schtick, maybe his explanation is worth listening to.

    Plagarism is a huge problem on campuses across the country right now (high school and college). ‘Taking’ someone else’s work just doesn’t seem to be a big deal. We need to DO something about it and maybe examples of consequence, like Domenech, can help.

  55. Fred says:

    I see no need to “break ranks” with Jeff on this:

    If he plagiarized, he was wrong for doing so, and resigning was a good first step to rehabilitating his credibility.

    What the hell is wrong with that position?

  56. natesnake says:

    STUPIDER

    Try Hooked-On-Phonics.  It worked for me.

  57. Brett says:

    The “calumnies” I read mostly took the form of questioning his extreme views, his qualifications as a journalist, and the WaPo’s rationale for hiring him.

    You didn’t read particularly extensively.

    Those are all off limits because a Democrat once plagiarized a speech? What are we supposed to talk about, his hair?

    Questioning his views (extremism being in the eye of the beholder), his qualifications as a journalist, and the WaPo’s rationale for hiring him need not include accusing him of racism, homophobia, and, incredibly, of having had sexual relations with his own mother.

  58. Defense Guy says:

    I’ll mark Robert Green down as ideologically pure as well.

    It’s odd that they can’t simply say ‘yeah, he shouldn’t have done that either and he should be fired as well’.  But then that would be expecting a principled response rather than a partisan one.

  59. Frume-kin says:

    Maybe Ben will threaten to slap someone around with his cock.  I hear that some people do that.

  60. Brainster says:

    What I would like to see now is an effort to expose all the untrue things the cretins on the Left accused Domenech of before they finally found a charge that stuck.

  61. Matthew O. says:

    ss:

    Well said.

    We are better than the hateful leftists and this is an opportunity to prove it.

  62. benjaminthomas says:

    Plagiarism is perhaps the most serious offense that a writer can commit or be accused of.

    Perhaps if you add “in the normal course of doing their job.” But even that is not really true, is it?  This seems to me like an example of journalists glorifying their profession, to the extent that violating the rules of that profession become the greatest sin imaginable.

    It’s like a sportsradio jock said the other day, which is the greater sin, what Michael Irvin did (broke the law by using illegal drugs) or what Terrell Owens did (broke team rules)?

    All of the following are much great sins that a writer could commit:

    Murder

    Rape

    Armed robbery

    And the following are probably worse sins in the course of doing their job:

    Misrepresenting quotes from sources

    Beating up sources for information

    Entrapment

  63. Blow Me, I'm Irish says:

    “While Dan Rather has his subordinates fabricate quotes and steal other people’s writings,”

    Comparing this racist, spotty-faced serial plagerist to Dan Rather is like comparing fungi growing from dung to a sequoia.

    You dolts just love to crow about the dubious origins of the documents cited by CBS when they exposed your King George the Lying Hearted as a cowardly, draft-dodging child of privilege, without EVER offering any evidence to the contrary…and WHY can’t you?….because it’s one of MANY uncomfortable truths you delusional dolts can’t face.

  64. tb says:

    Who’s Ward Churchill?  He sounds very important.

    He’s an invention, Davey; someone the right wing had to pull out of richly-deserved obscurity as an example of the wacko left because mainstream liberals weren’t obligingly extreme enough.

  65. Good Grief Jeff! You’re getting more moonbats than I am!!

  66. actus says:

    Unless you’re insinuating that I’m a creationist red-baiting liar. In which case, put up or shut up.

    I haven’t read you say anything creationist, or red-baiting, or lying. But I have read our dear young benny do so. That’s the guy that describes froomkin this way.

    IF YOU THINK ANYONE ON THE LEFT GIVES A SH*T ABOUT WARD CHURCHILL OR ANYTHING THAT HE WRITES, YOU ARE EVEN STUPIDER THAN I COULD HAVE THOUGHT POSSIBLE.

    I have to disagree. I enjoyed “A Little Matter of Genocide,’ at least for introducing me to the controversy of holocaust exclusivism. I also enjoyed “Pacifism as Pathology.” It was very thought provoking, helped me get over some of the pacifist sorts of tendencies I had, and made me want to get more familiar with firearms.

  67. Joe says:

    What ss said, in spades. Enjoy your brief moment of glory, moonbats; you get so few of them.

    BTW, has it occurred to you clods that no one here is defending Domenech’s plagiarism? Jeff simply declared he would accept the explaination – not that he agreed with or defended it. You keep skipping the next part of his statement above, “Because I also found him to be quite a forthright gentleman, which means that I expect he will admit to any wrongdoing”.

    Not that we’d expect you to actually read the whole post, or anything stressful like that – we’re pretty well versed in your penchant for out-of-context quotes. But how about just reading the very next sentence, fer chrissakes?

  68. kyle says:

    Jeez it smells in here.  Will someone please close the door?

  69. Darleen says:

    Dan Rather is a seqouia?

    Well, I’m convinced on just who “I’m Irish” is lusting to blow.

  70. Defense Guy says:

    So tb makes 3 in the pure as the left leaning snow column.  Too bad, I had kinda hoped he would have been the one to show independant thought.

    For those keeping count the score is:

    Partisanship: 3

    Principles: 0

    I’m expecting a blowout.  Eh, maybe actus will take a stand.  I always hold out hope for him.

  71. Darleen says:

    Joe

    Not that we’d expect you to actually read the whole post, or anything stressful like that

    The Left cult members don’t think Jeff uses enough periods.

    Anything deeper than See Spot Run makes them very nervous and apt to yip and snap.

    The Left is to The Party of Tolerance as Islamism is to The Religion of Peace.

  72. salvage says:

    Ward Churchill?!!??

    Ahahahahah!!!

    Do y’all keep him in a big box with a mallet with a sign that reads “In Case Liberals Right Break Glass”?

    There are many things in our big world we can debate, some things can be resolved others will go on forever. However there are topics like say raping the corpse of your grandmother at the Thanksgiving table that we can all agree are bad.

    Plagiarism, (and kids that’s what this is, even an idiot like Malkin can spot it) is the journalism / blogoshpere equivalent.

    And the only one stupider than Ben (for kerist’s sake he thought in the age of Google he’d get away with it?!?! What is he? Amish?) is any fool that defends him. You can still be his pal but at some point to be a true friend you’d have to sit him down and say “Ben you screwed the pooch and it’s time for you to come clean and find a new job.”

    Because this is an albatross that will follow him wherever he goes and it’ll be a long time before he can chalk it up to “youthful indiscretion”.

    If ever.

  73. Robert Green says:

    thanks, defense guy, i appreciate being marked down as “ideologically pure” based on a sarcastic and snarky comment on this blog.  that i pointed out, using satire, that ward churchill is not a central member of the left, and that ben domenench quite clearly is a central figure on the right, flew right over your head.

    but then such subtleties of thought seem to escape many around here. 

    as for ideological purity, in addition to being an infelicitous phrase, go to my blog and dig around.  you will find that yours was a hasty and ill-informed judgement, though i suspect it wasn’t your first nor will it be your last.

  74. rls says:

    I’m expecting a blowout.  Eh, maybe actus will take a stand.  I always hold out hope for him.

    Why?  If you ignore them, including acthole, they will eventually go away.  Don’t respond to any of them, they are not worth the effort.  The principled, intelligent lefty is an endangered species.  When you actually encounter one, you mistake it for an Independent or a Liberal Republican/Libertarian.

    You can’t engage this swarm and acthole just flies by and drops turds. 

    Wear a hat.  And keep your pants zipped.

  75. Spiny Norman says:

    You dolts just love to crow about the dubious origins of the documents cited by CBS when they exposed your King George the Lying Hearted as a cowardly, draft-dodging child of privilege, without EVER offering any evidence to the contrary…and WHY can’t you?….because it’s one of MANY uncomfortable truths you delusional dolts can’t face.

    What part of “complete fabrication” don’t you understand? How can demonstrably phony documents “prove” anything, other than you gullible dopes on the Left will believe anything that supports your partisan masturbation fantasies? What kind of pathetic argument do you have, if you must make shit up to prove it?

  76. Blow Me, I'm Irish says:

    BTW:  Many of us on the left regarded Ward Churchill with just as much contempt as you…

    All of this claptrap just serves to further distract people from the criminal actions of Chimpy McCodpiece and his puppeteers at CheneyBurton…

    Read up people….Greg Palast of the Guardian has a new column about Bush’s Criminal Cabal and how Big Oil has benefitted from our immoral and illegal invasion of Iraq.

    Big Oil’s profits before Chimpy’s Iraqi mis-Adventure?  A paltry 34 Billion.

    After?  $113 Billion.

    Are we paying less at the pump?  No.

    Will you ever get it?

  77. Brett says:

    I haven’t read you say anything creationist, or red-baiting, or lying. But I have read our dear young benny do so. That’s the guy that describes froomkin this way.

    I’m pleased we’ve been able to establish that one need not be a creationist, red-baiting liar to believe that Froomkin’s a lying lefty shill.

    I agree that “weasel-faced” was probably overboard, though. Weasels have at least a somewhat redeeming aesthetic.

  78. neil says:

    What does Ward Churchill have to do with anything?

    Can you find any example of a liberal blog favorably quoting Ward Churchill? As far as I know, the only people who are at all interested in what he says are conservatives. This would certainly explain why the WSJ hired him.

  79. Defense Guy says:

    Just for the record, I didn’t defend Ben for plagiarism and a quick look around the righto-sphere shows very little of that.

    That said, salvage makes 4.  Anyone want to start taking bets on if even one will break ranks?

    Partisanship: 4

    Principles: 0

    Robert Green, I understood your snark.  I would give it a few points except I’ve seen it used so many times as a defense and a dodge that it’s just not original enough.  You can change your answer at any time.  Morals are something you can acquire at any time regardless of past activity.

  80. Biden not leftie enough for ya actus?

  81. To Those Visitng From Eschaton,

    Out of curiosity, did any of y’all have an actual point you were making or an argument you are supporting, or any thing of that sort?

    BRD

  82. salvage says:

    quick look around the righto-sphere shows very little of that.

    Pst

    I guess Red State isn’t the “righto-sphere”?

  83. Defense Guy says:

    rls

    I hear you.  That said, I am an eternal optimist.

    Ok, 2 more for partisanship.  Although I would be interested to see a link to a left leaning site that backs up the claim that ‘BTW:  Many of us on the left regarded Ward Churchill with just as much contempt as you…’ because frankly the proof is in the pudding.

    Partisanhip: 6

    Principle: 0

    Don’t worry rls, I’ll call the game soon due to overwhelming sadness.  Although you are wrong about their being no principled liberals.  There just don’t seem to be many from the Kos/Atrios crowd.

  84. topsecretk9 says:

    What does Ward Churchill have to do with anything?

    It’s only that if you’re a leftist plagiarist your career advances.

  85. Jeff Goldstein says:

    Of course, he did blog under a “stage name.” T’was “Augustine”, I believe, it was under that nom de plume that he wrote some of his more vile screeds.

    From what I understand, he did this after receiving a few threats.

  86. actus says:

    Biden not leftie enough for ya actus?

    The guy voted for the bankrupty bill. God bless his work on derailing that nutcase Bork, and on the VAWA, neither of which are particularly lefty. But the bankruptcy bill? Nasty shit.

    Eh, maybe actus will take a stand.  I always hold out hope for him.

    I told you where I stand on ward churchill: I liked his thought provoking work against pacifism.

  87. neil says:

    The exciting thing to watch now is that Domenech has now accused his former editor of lifting from Salon—twice. Now, I am not a lawyer, but I do know that not everybody was born with the same kind of spoon in their mouth as Ben. And unless Ben has some pretty good evidence to back him up, it seems like he has committed an actionable offense of libel. Anyone know?

  88. 6Gun says:

    Ah, leftist bobbleheads ankle-biting their way to yet another 15 seconds of glory.

    (Que terse newzcast music): 

    The Left’s 2006 To Date. 

    -Shot in the Face!(tm) Dateline February! 

    -Plagarism!(tm) Dateline March!

    Surely this annual cycle will go down in history as the turning point in The Great Moonbat Implosion of The Early 21st Century.  Yawn.

    I haven’t head this much fun since the whining Berkeley kidz daycare study fell down and went boom-boom.

    When was that, yesterday?

  89. Defense Guy says:

    I told you where I stand on ward churchill: I liked his thought provoking work against pacifism.

    I was writing while this was being posted.  So you want to be marked down as pro-plagiarism as long as it falls along acceptable partisan lines as well?

  90. salvage says:

    an actual point you were making

    Yes, that Ben was a plagiarist, a lair and a hypocrite, that the WaPo was grotesquely stupid in giving him a blog and that anyone who defends all that is WaPo editor in chief material.

    Clear?

    heh the “Submit the word you see below” word is french.

  91. Jeff Goldstein says:

    Jeralyn —

    I wrote:

    I consider Ben a friend.  If he plagiarized, he was wrong for doing so, and resigning was a good first step to rehabilitating his credibility.

    I’m not sticking up for him regarding the plagiarism charges—though I’d like to hear the whole story.  I’m saying I trust in Ben’s integrity.  If he did it, he’ll fess up to it and apologize.

  92. Major John says:

    Darleen – I guess I was leaping ahead to his explanation being an excuse.  My mistake. I should wait to see what he says.

    One thing I would encourage in our recently arriving Atrois/Kos/whomever visitors is manners.  You’d be surprised how much more receptive people can be to an argument that isn’t started with bile and invective.  We get plenty of low quality polemics in the comments here – raise the bar, please.

    I would rather nobody, regular or new sling insults.  Let us try ideas instead, OK?

  93. rls says:

    Although you are wrong about their being no principled liberals.

    I didn’t say there were none.  I actually know several and actually are related to some.  What I meant, if I wasn’t clear, is that the sighting of such a creature here is extremely rare.

    Most of the port side that visit here fling feces, pick nits, jump up and down and chatter endlessly the same chants.

  94. salvage says:

    although I would be interested to see a link to a left leaning site that backs up the claim that ‘BTW:  Many of us on the left regarded Ward Churchill with just as much contempt as you…

    While I can’t speak for the left and my site gets about as much traffic as http://www.watchmehumpyourdeadgrandmother.com hhhmm probably less this is what I had to say about him awhile back.

    And here.

  95. deus ex machina says:

    Questioning his views (extremism being in the eye of the beholder), his qualifications as a journalist, and the WaPo’s rationale for hiring him need not include accusing him of racism, homophobia, and, incredibly, of having had sexual relations with his own mother.

    I would denounce anyone who said such a thing, but so far I haven’t seen any proof that anyone actually accused him of engaging in such an activity.

  96. Blow Me, I'm Irish says:

    Spiny Norman, I salute your taste in comedy – but how is it that someone familiar with Doug and Dinsdale can be so lacking in critical thought?

    You have to work awfully hard to overlook Chimpy’s unique combination of privilege, ineptitude and criminality.

  97. 6Gun says:

    Emboldened by his fellows, atcuse finally grabs some sack:

    that nutcase Bork

    Oooh, actuse!

    I told you where I stand on ward churchill

    OH, ACTUSE!

    and on the VAWA, neither of which are particularly lefty.

    Normally I’d bust your ass on this one, actuse, but I’m much too flustered.  I so love kneeling down to gently stroke the mighty beads of sweat from your balding pate.  You GO, boy!

    tw:  Chief. OH!

  98. neil says:

    OK Defense Guy, I’ll play.

    A Google search for “ward churchill” site:dailykos.com. Let’s see what we get:

    Progressive Heroes—responding to a LGF post saying Ward Churchill is a progressive hero, this Kos diarist says Ward Churchill is not one of his heroes and then says who really is, and invites readers to do the same. None of them defend Churchill.

    Hannah Arendt, the banality of evil, Ward Churchill and little Eichmanns that lurk in our midst—a Kos blogger concludes that “Ward Churchill’s statement can be called insensitive, but it can not simply be dismissed as a stupid baseless comment.” Nobody disagrees.

    Instapundit Makes Stuff Up Too—Kos frontpage poster Armando reminds us that he condemned Churchill too.

    Defense Guy, I am going to continue to assume that this guy is a strawman who you whip out to take the heat off of your boys. Partisanship 1, Honesty 0.

  99. Jeff Goldstein says:

    Anybody else note that the lefties commenting here keep using this part of my post:

    On the charges of plagiarism, I’ll accept Ben’s explanation, whatever it is.

    …And leaving out the next line:

    Because I also found him to be quite a forthright gentleman, which means that I expect he will admit to any wrongdoing.

    This, while they are lecturing me on ethics and honesty and partisanship.

    Christ, it’s surreal.

  100. runninrebel says:

    It’s just around the corner!!!

    It’s just around the corner!!!

Comments are closed.